In the past, athletes have been provided with very basic footwear in the form of a very thin canvas topped and flat soled tennis shoe. When physical problems ensued from the strenous exercise that was normally undertaken by the athlete, the normal remedy was to insert an orthotic inside the shoe as needed. Present day shoes, currently manufactured by many companies, have progressed far from this early shoe and often neither an over-the-counter nor a "specially" made orthotic is needed. The shoes themselves function as an orthotic. This has resulted in far less foot problems for the general public.
In general, manufactured shoes are constructed for people with relatively symmetrical, evenly sized feet. For these people, the shoes can function to carry them many relatively pain-free miles with few problems. For those that do not fit into this category, however, the structured stability that has improved the shoes also results in a semirigidity that makes these shoes semiunforgiving to an active foot. This is particularly so in the "aging" foot, especially over their bony prominences and tendon insertions.
In the athlete's case, many of their lower extremity problems involve overuse and training errors such as rapidly accelerating distances or speeds. However, some of the injuries are due solely to the shoes they are wearing. For example, if an athlete wears shoes long enough to protect his toes, a possibility exists that his foot slips up and down in the mid and hind foot area of the shoe. If the athlete thickens his foot with two socks or fills his shoes with a sole-elevating orthotic, he may overfill his entire shoe including the toe box and, despite the filling, still have a foot that slips. The choices he is left with are to either overtighten his laces, thereby causing the possibility of ankle soreness, or dispose of the shoes and start over. If he chooses to continue wearing his shoes, eventually he will develop a sore arch, heel, forefoot and/or toe and either stop running or continue to run in pain. This problem is as old as the orthotic-prosthetic concept itself.
Prior devices have been proposed for ankle support and to provide protection for the non-ambulatory patient's feet and the like, as exemplified in U.S. Pat. Nos. 822,138, 1,565,259 and 3,226,058. However, these devices do not provide cushioning protection to the sensitive portions of an active foot, and especially, an athletic foot.
In view of the above disadvantages with many of the present day shoes, there exists a need for a form fitted apparatus to better interface the shoe and the foot, to not only cushion the sensitive portions of the active foot by absorbing shock and reducing friction, but also allow the shoe to perform its intended function by virtue of its better overall fit.